Matthews Lynn T, Burns Bridget F, Bajunirwe Francis, Kabakyenga Jerome, Bwana Mwebesa, Ng Courtney, Kastner Jasmine, Kembabazi Annet, Sanyu Naomi, Kusasira Adrine, Haberer Jessica E, Bangsberg David R, Kaida Angela
Center for Global Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Division of Infectious Disease, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 7;12(9):e0183131. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183131. eCollection 2017.
We explored acceptability and feasibility of safer conception methods among HIV-affected couples in Uganda.
We recruited HIV-positive men and women on antiretroviral therapy (ART) ('index') from the Uganda Antiretroviral Rural Treatment Outcomes cohort who reported an HIV-negative or unknown-serostatus partner ('partner'), HIV-serostatus disclosure to partner, and personal or partner desire for a child within two years. We conducted in-depth interviews with 40 individuals from 20 couples, using a narrative approach with tailored images to assess acceptability of five safer conception strategies: ART for the infected partner, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the uninfected partner, condomless sex timed to peak fertility, manual insemination, and male circumcision. Translated and transcribed data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
11/20 index participants were women, median age of 32.5 years, median of 2 living children, and 80% had HIV-RNA <400 copies/mL. Awareness of HIV prevention strategies beyond condoms and abstinence was limited and precluded opportunity to explore or validly assess acceptability or feasibility of safer conception methods. Four key partnership communication challenges emerged as primary barriers to engagement in safer conception care, including: (1) HIV-serostatus disclosure: Although disclosure was an inclusion criterion, partners commonly reported not knowing the index partner's HIV status. Similarly, the partner's HIV-serostatus, as reported by the index, was frequently inaccurate. (2) Childbearing intention: Many couples had divergent childbearing intentions and made incorrect assumptions about their partner's desires. (3) HIV risk perception: Participants had disparate understandings of HIV transmission and disagreed on the acceptable level of HIV risk to meet reproductive goals. (4) Partnership commitment: Participants revealed significant discord in perceptions of partnership commitment. All four types of partnership miscommunication introduced constraints to autonomous reproductive decision-making, particularly for women. Such miscommunication was common, as only 2 of 20 partnerships in our sample were mutually-disclosed with agreement across all four communication themes.
Enthusiasm for safer conception programming is growing. Our findings highlight the importance of addressing gendered partnership communication regarding HIV disclosure, reproductive goals, acceptable HIV risk, and commitment, alongside technical safer conception advice. Failing to consider partnership dynamics across these domains risks limiting reach, uptake, adherence to, and retention in safer conception programming.
我们探讨了乌干达受艾滋病毒影响的夫妇对更安全受孕方法的接受度和可行性。
我们从乌干达抗逆转录病毒农村治疗结果队列中招募了接受抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)的艾滋病毒阳性男性和女性(“指标对象”),他们报告有艾滋病毒阴性或血清学状态未知的伴侣(“伴侣”),向伴侣披露了艾滋病毒血清学状态,且个人或伴侣在两年内有生育意愿。我们对来自20对夫妇的40个人进行了深入访谈,采用叙事方法并结合定制图像来评估五种更安全受孕策略的可接受性:为感染伴侣提供抗逆转录病毒治疗、为未感染伴侣提供暴露前预防(PrEP)、在生育高峰期进行无保护性行为、人工授精和男性包皮环切术。对翻译和转录的数据进行了主题分析。
20名指标对象中有11名是女性,中位年龄为32.5岁,中位子女数为2个,80%的人艾滋病毒核糖核酸(HIV-RNA)<400拷贝/毫升。对避孕套和禁欲以外的艾滋病毒预防策略的认识有限,这排除了探索或有效评估更安全受孕方法的可接受性或可行性的机会。出现了四个关键的伴侣沟通挑战,成为参与更安全受孕护理的主要障碍,包括:(1)艾滋病毒血清学状态披露:尽管披露是纳入标准,但伴侣们通常表示不知道指标对象的艾滋病毒状态。同样,指标对象报告的伴侣的艾滋病毒血清学状态也经常不准确。(2)生育意愿:许多夫妇的生育意愿不同,并且对伴侣的愿望做出了错误假设。(3)艾滋病毒风险认知:参与者对艾滋病毒传播有不同的理解,并且在为实现生殖目标可接受的艾滋病毒风险水平上存在分歧。(4)伴侣承诺:参与者在对伴侣承诺的认知上存在明显分歧。所有这四种伴侣沟通失误都给自主生殖决策带来了限制,尤其是对女性而言。这种沟通失误很常见,因为在我们的样本中,20对伴侣中只有2对在所有四个沟通主题上都相互披露并达成了一致。
对更安全受孕项目规划的热情正在增长。我们的研究结果强调了在提供更安全受孕技术建议的同时,解决关于艾滋病毒披露、生殖目标、可接受的艾滋病毒风险和承诺的性别化伴侣沟通问题的重要性。不考虑这些领域的伴侣动态关系,可能会限制更安全受孕项目规划的覆盖范围、接受度、依从性和留存率。